Christian bakers who refused to make cake for homosexual "wedding" break gag order

[Inevitable]

I do think the fine charged against the bakers was excessive.

The original fine wasn't that large. But they defiantly decided to keep breaking the law. That is multiple fines coupled with failure to pay fees.

Not sure what the original fine was.

Perhaps they should had paid the original fine. But I guess they would have seen that as caving.

Perhaps they think they are making a stand. Perhaps it was 5000 dollars. Which I still find excessive.

 

[JoeMoma]

I do think the fine charged against the bakers was excessive.

The original fine wasn't that large. But they defiantly decided to keep breaking the law. That is multiple fines coupled with failure to pay fees.
Not sure what the original fine was.

Perhaps they should had paid the original fine. But I guess they would have seen that as caving.

Perhaps they think they are making a stand. Perhaps it was 5000 dollars. Which I still find excessive.

5000 is excessive for a mom and pop bake shop. For a very large business like Walmart its a drop in the bucket.

 

[Silhouette]

The law in Oregon did not violate the constitution.

Further the bible says nothing about homosexuality.

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

 

[JimBowie1958]

Agreed. The Judicial can't add things to the Constitution.

They're not supposed to redefine the English language either, but there they go anyway.

Have you read George Orwell's 1984? You should read the appendix in the back, where he defines and describes “Newspeak”. If you understand the point of what he describes there, I think you'll see that the modern wrong-wing movement is trying to do almost exactly what he described.

That is our situation, but mixed with an overall hedonistic flair.

That will end once the bastards figure out that they dont need the people to approve them any more.

And perhaps that day came about 28 years ago.

 

[Inevitable]

I do think the fine charged against the bakers was excessive.

The original fine wasn't that large. But they defiantly decided to keep breaking the law. That is multiple fines coupled with failure to pay fees.
Not sure what the original fine was.

Perhaps they should had paid the original fine. But I guess they would have seen that as caving.

Perhaps they think they are making a stand. Perhaps it was 5000 dollars. Which I still find excessive.

5000 is excessive for a mom and pop bake shop. For a very large business like Walmart its a drop in the bucket.

I'd agree.

 

[Inevitable]

The law in Oregon did not violate the constitution.

Further the bible says nothing about homosexuality.

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

 

[AmericanFirst1]

Why stop with mere trampling of rights. Demand a loyalty oath to guys signed in blood and evidenced by being gay fucked on camera shown in open court.

Its the same laws that apply to everyone else. Being Christian doesn't exempt you from State PA laws. Nor have they ever. Your conception of religion trumping all civil law is pseudo-legal nonsense.

Worse, you're clearly not thinking it through. As if Christians can ignore any civil law, then so can Muslims. WIth Sharia supreme over US civil law as surely as you insist Christian dogma is.

And since the bible doesn't even mention same sex marriage, nor cites wedding cakes for same sex marriages as any kind of sin......Muslims can just make up any justification they want to ignore any law.

Um, no. None of that is our system of law or constitution. Nor should be.

The Bible condemns homosexuality, read it before you use it falsely to support your lies.

 

[AmericanFirst1]

The law in Oregon did not violate the constitution.

Further the bible says nothing about homosexuality.

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Why stop with mere trampling of rights. Demand a loyalty oath to guys signed in blood and evidenced by being gay fucked on camera shown in open court.

Its the same laws that apply to everyone else. Being Christian doesn't exempt you from State PA laws. Nor have they ever. Your conception of religion trumping all civil law is pseudo-legal nonsense.

Worse, you're clearly not thinking it through. As if Christians can ignore any civil law, then so can Muslims. WIth Sharia supreme over US civil law as surely as you insist Christian dogma is.

And since the bible doesn't even mention same sex marriage, nor cites wedding cakes for same sex marriages as any kind of sin......Muslims can just make up any justification they want to ignore any law.

Um, no. None of that is our system of law or constitution. Nor should be.

The Bible condemns homosexuality, read it before you use it falsely to support your lies.

SIN LIST

 

[bodecea]

The law in Oregon did not violate the constitution.

Further the bible says nothing about homosexuality.

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Who cares about the bible....we are talking secular law.

 

[AmericanFirst1]

The law in Oregon did not violate the constitution.

Further the bible says nothing about homosexuality.

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Who cares about the bible....we are talking secular law.

Those secular laws are mans laws. Man is flawed. The Bible is truth.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The law in Oregon did not violate the constitution.

Further the bible says nothing about homosexuality.

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Who cares about the bible....we are talking secular law.

Those secular laws are mans laws. Man is flawed. The Bible is truth.

 

[Skylar]

The law in Oregon did not violate the constitution.

Further the bible says nothing about homosexuality.

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Who cares about the bible....we are talking secular law.

Those secular laws are mans laws. Man is flawed. The Bible is truth.

The Bible is interpreted by man. Man is flawed. As demonstrated by all the different sects of Christianity. And that's just one book. There are all sorts of other faiths, all sorts of other books. And most faiths are mutually exclusive. It can't be Jesus AND the greek pantheon of gods.

Which means that if one faith is right, all the others have to be wrong. Meaning, at best, at the absolute *best*, your process virtually always produces false results. With it entirely possible that *no* one got it right.

As god isn't here to break ties to tell us who got it right. Or if anyone did. Its just us. And we're flawed.

 

[AmericanFirst1]

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Who cares about the bible....we are talking secular law.

Those secular laws are mans laws. Man is flawed. The Bible is truth.

The Bible is interpreted by man. Man is flawed. As demonstrated by all the different sects of Christianity. And that's just one book. There are all sorts of other faiths, all sorts of other books. And most faiths are mutually exclusive. It can't be Jesus AND the greek pantheon of gods.

Which means that if one faith is right, all the others have to be wrong. Meaning, at best, at the absolute *best*, your process virtually always produces false results. With it entirely possible that *no* one got it right.

As god isn't here to break ties to tell us who got it right. Or if anyone did. Its just us. And we're flawed.

You are right The Bible is correct and others are wrong. One God, God of the Bible, period.

 

[AmericanFirst1]

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Who cares about the bible....we are talking secular law.

Those secular laws are mans laws. Man is flawed. The Bible is truth.

Wrong again.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Who cares about the bible....we are talking secular law.

Those secular laws are mans laws. Man is flawed. The Bible is truth.

Wrong again.

Nope...

 

[Bob Blaylock]

No contradiction, here.

God gave one set of laws to Noah and his immediate descendants. He gave a fuller law, many generations later, to the Israelites, through Moses. When Jesus came, he gave us a higher law than that given through Moses.

God certainly has the authority, to give somewhat different laws to people in different times, according to their differing needs, circumstances, and abilities.

 

[Inevitable]

The law in Oregon did not violate the constitution.

Further the bible says nothing about homosexuality.

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Yes he is. Leviticus says nothing about it nor Romans. I'm not really liberal.

 

[Inevitable]

The law in Oregon did not violate the constitution.

Further the bible says nothing about homosexuality.

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Who cares about the bible....we are talking secular law.

Well I believed those lies, I was once a boy and these imps had me believing I was an abomination.

It has nothing to do with secular law and everything to do with people. Particularly young people dealing with their sexuality. I am merely trying to help them know that the demons under steeples don't speak for God.

My correcting them is not about the law it's about people. People they would trample. If somebody spoke to me the way I speak perhaps I wouldn't have wasted my life trying to please demigods.

 

[Inevitable]

The law in Oregon did not violate the constitution.

Further the bible says nothing about homosexuality.

1. Yes it did: the 1st and 14th Amendments.

2. Yes it does: Romans 1 and most particularly Jude 1 of the New Testament. And very specific things said too; especially about allowing the phenomenon of a homosexual cult to spread throughout God's normal and moral heterosexual societies...

1. No it didn't.

2. You are mistaken.

2. No she isn't. Read Leviticus and Romans.
Libs are so wrong.

Who cares about the bible....we are talking secular law.

Those secular laws are mans laws. Man is flawed. The Bible is truth.

The bible was written by man just the same.